great sacrifices to the common interest of America (as they have already done on the subject of representation), and will be ready to listen to any just and reasonable proposition for removing the ostensible causes of delay to the complete ratification of the Confederation, they find themselves impelled by the duties which they owe to their constituents, to their posterity, to their country, and to the United States in general, to remonstrate and protest; and they do hereby, in the name and on behalf of the Commonwealth of Virginia, expressly protest against any jurisdiction or right of adjudication in Congress, upon the petitions of the Vandalia or Indiana companies, or on any other matter or things subversive of the internal policy, civil government or sovereignty of this or any other of the United American States, or unwarranted by the articles of the Confederation. " (Henning s Statutes, vol. 10, pp. 557-559.)
This remonstrance plainly showed that Virginia under stood her rights and intended to maintain them. It further distinctly stated that Virginia was willing to make great sacrifices, and invited propositions for removing the ostensible cause of delay in completing the Confederation. In short, it showed plainly that Virginia might be persuaded, but could not be coerced.
Maryland s plan of coercion having failed, Virginia having supplied the hint, New York now set the example of voluntary cession. She stepped forward as a mediator in the quarrel between her two Southern sisters. Her course was judicious, patriotic and adroit. Her legislature, by act of March 7, 1780, authorized her delegates in Congress to cede all her claims to the United States. This cession of New York could have no effect except the force of example. She assumed to give away what did not belong to her, yet she gave it with admirable grace and with suggestive purpose. Why could not the situation be relieved by voluntary cessions from other States?
The effect was happy. The way was opened to a
